Majority of Americans want a big power grid and more cheap, clean energy
The U.S. does not have a big enough power grid to accommodate rising energy demand — a fact that’s making electricity less affordable and reliable nationwide.
But there’s broad public support for growing the grid and allowing more electricity, including cheap, clean energy, to come online.
So says a new survey of likely voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania — two states in the severely backlogged PJM Interconnection grid region — and Arkansas, Mississippi, and Missouri, which are covered by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO). The survey was conducted by polling firm Cygnal on behalf of the Conservative Energy Network.
Roughly three-fourths of likely voters support expanding the electric grid, the survey found. About two-thirds are in favor of adding more transmission lines to connect clean energy and strengthen grid reliability.
And nearly 90% of respondents are concerned about rising energy costs. A majority of surveyed Republicans, Democrats, and Independents said they are “very concerned.”
“This is not a partisan issue. … You don’t have to appeal to one side or another,” said Chris Lane, a senior partner at Cygnal, who previewed the findings at the National Conservative Energy Summit in Cleveland on Aug. 25.
He noted that the results stand out for their consistency between regions and among different groups — including political parties. Even so, the Trump administration has in recent months worked against grid expansion, not toward it.
Adding more “lanes” to the grid
Energy costs are climbing in part because of rising power demand from data centers and the electrification of buildings and vehicles. Bringing more electricity generation online — especially quick-to-build, low-cost wind and solar — could increase competition and lower prices under the basic principles of supply and demand.
But just as transportation planners need to make sure highways can handle increased road traffic, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and regional transmission operators need to make sure the grid has room for more electrons. That calls for more “lanes” in the form of added transmission lines, plus technologies to squeeze more capacity out of the system overall.
While all of the United States faces delays in getting new energy onto the grid, the problem is worst in the PJM region, where hundreds of projects have been stalled in the queue for years. To deal with the backlog, the grid operator switched to a new interconnection process in 2023; as of June, PJM still had about 63 gigawatts of power, mostly clean energy, stuck in that “transition queue.”
Across the country, wind, solar, and battery storage make up most of the resources waiting to come online, and their “levelized cost of energy” is cheaper or on par with other electricity sources.
The Trump administration has called for “the rapid and efficient buildout” of energy infrastructure, including transmission lines and grid-enhancing technologies, “by easing Federal regulatory burdens.”
But the administration’s actions have so far had the opposite effect. A February executive order calling for review of independent agency rulings threatens the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s ability to expand transmission. And in July, the Trump administration canceled a $4.9 billion loan guarantee for the Grain Belt Express — the largest transmission line underway in the United States. The project aims to shuttle gigawatts of wind and solar power from the Great Plains to the East, and Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., has called the cancellation of its federal loan guarantee illegal.
The administration’s policies, including the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, are also expected to more than halve the amount of clean energy built over the next decade, further exacerbating concerns about soaring power prices and rising demand.
What’s on voters’ minds
The survey results may help the Conservative Energy Network convince decision makers to take steps to expand the grid.
“To the best of my knowledge, this is the first poll that’s been done in the PJM area testing these things, and in the MISO south area,” said John Szoka, the group’s CEO, at the National Conservative Energy Summit.
The polling also gauged the persuasiveness of four statements to support grid expansion. The takeaways could inform how advocates and legislators work to boost public support for clean energy.
Among conservatives in Ohio and Pennsylvania, a message focused on lower costs was about 12 times more likely to shift someone’s opinion than one about preventing blackouts, Lane noted. Messages about increasing American energy production, preventing blackouts, and providing positive job and economic impacts for Americans were more likely to move liberals than one about lowering costs.
Opinions were more divided on whether the federal government, states, or private companies should pay for grid expansion, although a slight majority of respondents in both the PJM and MISO areas said they would be willing to pay a few dollars more per month in the short term if it would reduce outages and lower costs over time.
Respondents were also mixed on who should get to choose how electricity is produced. States, landowners, and local officials all ranked above federal authorities.
Clean energy, meanwhile, received only modest support on its own. About one-fourth of the Ohio and Pennsylvania respondents said using clean energy was one of their top two policy goals, with nearly one-fifth of those surveyed in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Missouri giving that response.
Ultimately, affordability and reliability were the clear consensus energy policy priorities for poll respondents in both the PJM and MISO areas.
With the federal government standing in the way of both grid expansion and clean energy development, however, it will be tough for the voters to get the improvements they want.
This story was originally published by Canary Media.
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.